

Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Community
Ask the community for help and clear up your study doubts
Discover the best universities in your country according to Docsity users
Free resources
Download our free guides on studying techniques, anxiety management strategies, and thesis advice from Docsity tutors
While poverty causes and perpetuates ill-health, economic growth also entails a multitude of potential health hazards. H ealth and economic development go hand ...
Typology: Study notes
1 / 2
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!
4 World^ Heolth^ •^ November-December^1992
ealth and economic development go hand in hand. Whether the focus is on countries or people, those with the highest incomes tend to have the highest levels of health and life expectancy. Eight of the "top ten" countries in terms of per capita income are also in the "top ten" in terms of life expectancy: Canada, Finland, Germany, Japan, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, and the USA. Most of these countries are also in the "bottom ten" in terms of infant mortality, with rates between five and seven per 1000 live births (data from: World development report, 1992, New York, Oxford University Press). At the other end of the spectrum, the poorest countries and the poorest people have the lowest levels of health. "Rich country, poor children" (page 12) shows how much higher are the risks of ill-health for the poor in one rich country, the USA. But how exactly does a person's or a country's level of economic development affect health? Firstly, it has to be acknowledged that good health, like most "goods", costs money. Those who can afford to spend more on their health - up to a point - seem to benefit the most. And spending on health is not just about medicines and medical attention, but
includes expenditures on building and maintaining a healthy environment, with safe streets and roads, controlled pollution, and safe water. Historical studies have shown that, as people's income grows, their nutritional status improves. They live longer and their children are more likely to survive to adulthood. Prosperity allows communities to improve their physical environment and hygiene. But prosperity brings its own risks to health, as the articles by Professor Ramalingaswami (page 24) and Messrs Verhoef & Bos (page 15) illustrate. Comparisons among countries show a clear tendency for a
fall in the rate at which health improves, as the levels of health and income increase. Each additional deutschmark or dollar of extra spending on health buys les s, in terms of measurable improvements in health status or life expectancy. One explanation for this could be that potential health improvements are offset by the risks from an unhealthy life-style, with too little exercise, too rich a diet, too much alcohol and too much stress. Another possible explanation is that, once good basic preventive and curative services are in place, the extra cost of saving or prolonging life (particularly where the
World Healt~ • November-Docember 1992
average age of the population is increasing) through specialized interventions rises at a disproportion- ately fast rate in relation to health outcomes. Higher income thus partly explains better health, but also brings new health risks.
Bad health costs money
But the connections between health and money are not just one way. Bad health also costs money, to individuals and to countries. Illness reduces activity, whether this is the working time of a chief executive or the daily round of a busy housewife and mother. A day off work is a day's output lost, see box on "Ill-health retards development" (page 21 ). In industrialized countries, the time lost through ill.ness is often far greater than the time lost through strikes, although strikes typically receive much more publicity. Poverty and ill-health are mutually reinforcing, as the article by Dr Watkins argues (page 18), in a "vicious cycle" in which poor health produces poor productivity, which in turn means low income. Of course, some improvements in health can be achieved at very little cost. Immunization against measles, use of oral rehydration therapy to treat diarrhoea, blindness prevention by appropriate diet as described in "Preventing blindness in Zambia" (page 20), or enforcing speed limits on the roads -these activities can save thousands of lives at a cost of just a few dollars each. Spending money in such ways constitutes a profitable investment for society, since the savings which result can be shown to be worth many times the cost. Health- related activities can also be directly income-generating in very different ways, as shown in "Undesirable weeds" (page 25) and "Marketing for health" (page 13). Most countries continue to underinvest in the most cost-effective ways of improving the health of their population; there is in fact considerable scope for improving health levels without dramatically increasing overall expenditure. Poverty causes and perpetuates ill-
health. Economic growth allows people greater choice, and more control over their lives. One of the things people choose is better health. Other choices which people make as their income increases contribute to the same things - better food, housing and clothing. But growth also entails potential health hazards - direct risks associated with higher production such as accidents at work, environmental damage, or rapid and unplanned urban growth, and indirect risks resulting from greater affluence. "Health risks from small businesses" (page I 0) and "Child labour" (page 8) dramatically illustrate this point.
Paths to healthy growth
"Healthy" economic growth is something which is difficult to achieve. A better economic situation is often a first priority for people and for countries. But this need not lead to a neglect of enriching health investments, such as those mentioned above, nor should it lead to the pursuit of narrow financial objectives which cause damage to individuals' health and to the physical and social environment. Finding paths to healthy growth is a challenge which faces both rich and poor countries.
s
As a first step, better knowledge is needed about how industrial, agricultural and household consumption processes affect health. Establishing scientific knowledge about the health risks of, for example, exposure to asbestos or tobacco smoke is often a lengthy and controversial process. The results of research in these areas are of value to all countries. Secondly, achieving healthy growth involves finding ways to regulate health-damaging actions. This may mean that health policies have increasingly to focus on changing both patterns of production (what is produced, where and how it is produced) and patterns of consumption. In several countries, trends in the consumption of tobacco and high-fat foods have shown dramatic changes in recent years as the awareness of health risks has spread. This provides important evidence that people do change their consumption behaviour when they are made aware of possible health damage, and when they have alternatives. •
Mr Andrew Creese is responsible for National Health Sys tem s and Policies , Division of Streng thening of Health Services , WHO , I 2 11 Geneva 27, Switzerland.